Skip to content

The Optimal Injection Site for a 3D Guided Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Device (IANBD)

The Optimal Injection Site for a 3D Guided Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block Device (IANBD): A Randomized Control Trial

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06676098
Acronym
IANBD
Enrollment
10
Registered
2024-11-06
Start date
2025-12-17
Completion date
2027-11-01
Last updated
2026-01-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Inferior Alveolar Nerve Block

Keywords

Inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB), Inferior alveolar nerve block device (IANBD), 3D guided IANBD, Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)

Brief summary

Given the thicker cortical bone in the mandible compared to the maxilla, mandibular teeth cannot be effectively anesthetized via local infiltration anesthesia. Instead, clinicians typically perform regional anesthesia and most commonly, Inferior Alveolar Nerve block (IANB). However, the inferior alveolar nerve is deeply submerged by surrounding structures of bone, muscles, ligaments and vessels. Traditional IANB is a technique by using anatomical landmarks not directly related to Inferior Alveolar Nerve (IAN) to approximate the location of mandibular foramen, where IAN enters mandible. IANB is considered a blind technique and known for the lack of accuracy and precision. The failure rate can be as high as 30-45%. In contrast, the investigator's cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) guided IANB device (IANBD) effectively directs the needle to the mandibular foramen which improves the success rate of the IANB on the first attempt, minimizes injection tissue damage, and reduces patient discomfort. In this proof of concept trial, a 3D printed CBCT guided IANBD will be used to administer anesthesia at three injection sites instead of the traditional IANB technique. Participants will be consented patients at the postdoctoral endodontic treatment center, Department of Endodontics, Boston University (BU) Henry M. Goldman School of Dentistry. The goal of this research is to to evaluate the acceptability, safety, and effectiveness of guided anesthesia using the IANBD by enrolling 10 subjects who require non-surgical endodontic therapy with a simple, affordable and reliable prototype to be used by clinicians in the dental care setting.

Interventions

PROCEDUREIANBD 3D guided approach

The IANBD will be used to administer the dental anesthetic 2mm medial to the lingula

Sponsors

Boston University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patient of Henry M. Goldman School of Dentistry (GSDM) * Medical History indicating American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA)1 * Need Non-surgical Endodontic Therapy on Mandibular Molar or Premolar * Asymptomatic pulpal diagnosis (normal, necrotic, asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis, retreatment with no symptoms) * The quadrant to be treated must have at least 3 vital teeth. * Going to receive a CBCT required for clinical purposes * Must be willing to receive guided IANB

Exclusion criteria

* Allergy to lidocaine or articaine * Resin allergy * Normal teeth unresponsive to thermal testing (ie calcified chamber) * Prior jaw surgery * Currently pregnant

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Participant acceptability30 minutes post dental procedureFor this proof of concept trial, the investigators developed a questionnaire with 3 open-ended questions asking participants; 1) did they have mandibular anesthesia before for a dental procedure and if yes how did this compare, 2) was the size of the device acceptable, and 3) was the taste of the device acceptable. The responses will be assessed to determine if overall the IANBD was acceptable or not to each participant.
Clinician acceptability30 minutes post dental procedureFor this proof of concept trial, the investigators developed a questionnaire with 5 open-ended questions asking clinicians; 1) how easy was it to set up the IANBD, 2) how time consuming was it to use the IANBD, 3) could you visualize the needle with the device, 4) are you likely to switch to the IANBD, and 5) compare this technique with previous IANB methods. The responses will be assessed to determine if overall the IANBD was acceptable or not to each clinician.
Safety of IANBD based on number of adverse eventsat the end of the study, about 2 yearsThe number of adverse events that occur will be abstracted from records of the procedure for each participant.
Safety of IANBD based on type of adverse eventsat the end of the study, about 2 yearsThe types of adverse events that occur will be abstracted from records of the procedure for each participant.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pulp vitalitybaseline, 1 minute, 4 minutes, 7 minutes, 10 minutes, 13 minutesThe Cold test will be done to assess pulpal vitality/anesthesia. If the Cold test is negative, the anesthesia is successful.

Countries

United States

Contacts

CONTACTTum-Yi Hsu, DMD DScD
thsu@bu.edu(617) 358-3481
CONTACTEmily Wen, DDS
emilywen@bu.edu
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORTum-Yi Hsu, DMD DScD

BU Goldman School of Dental Medicine, Endodontics

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026